Okay, good afternoon everyone. Welcome
to the regular open meeting of the
Sewish Town Council, Tuesday, August the
18th at 2 p.m. in council chambers. So,
could we please have [clears throat] an
approval of the agenda and there are no
late items? No. Thank you. Thank you,
Councelor Bennett, Councelor Chong. All
in favor? Thank you. and the adoption of
some minutes, the regular open minutes
from July the 21st and the special open
minutes from July the 28th. Could we
have the adoption councelor King,
Councelor Potter Rica? All in favor?
Thank you. So, first off, we have a
development variance permit application
DVP 26-02
for 8 Chardonnay Court and our planner
um Miss Dwang is online. So, please go
ahead, Miss Dwang.
>> Thank you. So, I don't have a a
PowerPoint presentation for this item
since we just reviewed it at the last
council meeting. Um, but just as a quick
recap, at the last council meeting in
July, um, council had postponed
consideration of this item pending
further information regarding the
driveway dimensions at the property. Um,
so staff did end up following up on the
resolution by undertaking a site visit
to measure out uh, the driveway and it
was found that the driveway is
approximately 6.4 4 m to 6.9 m um as it
exists between the building wall um to
the end of the driveway as it extends
beyond the parcel line but excludes uh
the sidewalk area of course and uh we
just want to highlight that despite this
from a staff perspective uh we just we
do reiterate that the purpose of the
provision of off- streetet uh parking
within the parcel boundaries is
generally to avoid externalization of
uses on public lands um and also to
mitigate potential conflicts associated
with those. Um, additionally, we do
remain concerned regarding the potential
cumulative impacts of similar variance
requests coming in um, along Chardonnay
court and the potential approval of
those requests where this application
were to be approved. So, uh, we are
continuing to recommend denial uh, with
respect to this application. Thank you.
>> Uh, thank you very much, Miss Dwong. I'm
going to um ask if the applicant, Miss
McCay or the applicant's uh um designate
would like to speak. You have five
minutes. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Mayor McCordoff. Um my name
is Gina McCay. I am the applicant for
the owner at 8 Chardonnay Court. And
Terl actually wanted to be here today,
but she wasn't able to, so she did
provide a letter that I'll read for her
on her behalf. Attention to Sue Town
Council. Thanks for taking the time to
review my variance request in detail. I
understand that Ms. Mccay has
represented my case thoroughly, but I
believe a letter of self-representation
will also add some enlightenment to this
application. One year ago, my two boys
and I purchased the newly built home at 8 Chardonnay Court. I purchased
this home in a quiet residential street
in Paradise in hopes this would be my
forever bungalow in my retirement and
later years. In the final negotiations
of the sale of the house, it was agreed
in the final offer that a full kitchen
with all appliances would be added as an
independent suite in the house which has
a door connecting to the upstairs. With
the understanding that this would be
done lawfully and with permitting, I
agreed to the sale and purchase the
home. Based on my single income, it not
been feasible for me to purchase the
home without the option of having
tenants in this independent dwelling.
With that in mind, my real estate and I
addressed the legalization of the suite
and I told her it was paramount to
moving forward. We were reassured by the
selling agent that the suite would be
able to be legalized and met full
requirements. My largest concern if
there is damage to the home in an
independent dwelling, my insurance would
not cover the cost of the damage. It is
also important in alignment with my
morals that we do things right and avoid
illegal business activities. Upon taking
ownership of the home, um it was
incredibly important for me to have the
suite legalized. Without approval of the
variance, the secondary suite cannot be
legalized and the rental income required
to sustain home home ownership will no
longer be possible. After I moved into
the home, I started to legalize the
suite, but came up with the issue of
tenants parking on my driveway. I put in
an application in November last year and
then was um weeks later was it was made
clear to me that the reason having
tenants park in my driveway has become a
concern is that the town um property is
um is about onethird of my driveway. Um
this was a fact that I was never made
aware of at the time of the sale of the
home. As we move further into the
approval, I became aware that the
builder had not applied for the required
building permit to build the kitchen in
the suite, which is another major
concern to having the suite legalized.
As the matter continued and the
terminology in the process became far
more complex for me to handle on my own,
I withdrew my application and to
consider my options. At this point, I
was advised that Ms. McCay was available
for hire and could professionally handle
my application. In this application, my
neighbors have brought up many valuable
points and concerns regarding parking on
the street, and I validate their
concerns. I'm also in agreement with my
neighbors about the width of our
culde-sac road and the ability of
emergency vehicles to pass and children
at play, mine being two of them. Um,
this application is a specific request
to allow the town to allow my tenant to
park on the town's portion of my
driveway and not in the street at all.
My neighbors have never comp commented
or complained about my tenants parking
in the street as it's simply been a
non-issue and doesn't happen. After the
last council meeting, my driveway was
measured and it was proven that there
was enough room to park three vehicles
in my driveway. My neighbors will agree
that over the last year, the tenants
have been in my suite, they have never
parked on the street. I also believe
that my neighbors would agree that only
a few times have they ever seen my
company park on the street. That is only
if it's been a major holiday. If that's
a concern, my my family is more than
happy to park on 36th Avenue. The
application at this variance is
regarding whether the town is willing to
allow my tenant to park on their portion
of the driveway 100% off the street 100%
of the time. Once again, I appreciate
your careful consideration of this
matter and trust you will understand the
reasoning to have this parking approved
so it's able to be lawful to have a
legal suite in my home to manage the
costs associated with my home to add
well scrutinized reference checked
population density to su and to maintain
a quiet peaceful culde-sac. Uh with kind
regards Terrell Hector. Now I just
personally from a professional
perspective want to take one moment to
just identify four specific points.
First council asked that the driveway be
measured and then the town's um has
confirmed now that it's four 6.4 to 6.9
m long which is more than the 6 m
minimum. The application does not seek
uh permission for street parking or
another suite. It seeks a specific sight
specific variance for the parking
requirement associated with one
secondary suite. The precedent uh
concern it should be considered for
sure. Um but approval of this variance
does not create a blanket exemption.
Each future application will remain
subject to its own sightsp specific
assessment. And I just want to remind
council that the application for the DVP
was made made in order to address the
situation that the homeowner became
aware of after she attempted to obtain a
business license. It was not made in
response to a bylaw complaint or for any
concerns received at town hall because
of street parking um by the owner's
tenants. Thank you. Thanks.
>> Thank you very much, Miss McKay. Um,
council, does anybody have any questions
or concerns about this application?
I have one question and perhaps Miss
McCay can answer it. Perhaps Miss Dwong
can. We have heard from several people
in the culde-sac that there is not just
one um suite in the basement, but in
fact there are two. And several people
have
sent us emails saying that they're they
have seen and talked to the two renters
in the basement. Has can you answer
that, Miss McCay, or um I'm I'm not sure
where to go with that information.
>> Thank you, Mayor McCordov. I actually
cannot either um um collaborate or deny
that. I have not seen that portion of
the basement. I have seen the suite. I
have not been into the other portion of
the basement, but the tenant or the
owner, Ter
a um roommate who whose roommate whose
room is in the basement and she can
access that suite from outside. So, as
part of the building permit application
process, the um the owner has no problem
having that area of the house inspected
and if anything needs to be brought up
to code or whatnot, she has no problem
with that. But there is only one suite
and she's applying for one suite
» council. This becomes very confusing
because we have had numerous uh
residents on the street that have um
sent us information that we have to
consider. and the um the owner of the
property who owned the whole property at
one point and did the developing uh of the 18 lots is quite concerned about
what is happening. Um so um we're this
is a a difficult um issue to deal with.
I guess I will go first. I am quite
concerned about all of the buildings and
the then the cars and the trucks and
everything else that could be in there.
And um I my my I'm tempted to uh go
along with the recommendation that this
variance be denied and I am happy to
listen to anybody else on council who
would like to speak to this.
No,
go ahead, counselor Chong.
>> Thank you. I think me and Jim were just
having a little bit of a
» fair enough. Um I think it's important
to to clarify um this this case here. I
mean there is some confusion. Uh there
seems to be a consistent theme through
all the correspondents and that is a
concern of um blocking emergency
vehicles um from entering the culdeac
because there may be vehicles that are
parked on the street. However, as as
staff have confirmed, there is adequate
space on the driveway for um all three
vehicles to park on the driveway. And
that space also aligns with our um
parking bylaws. The issue here is that
by the property line, part of that space
is public even though it's paved exactly
the same as the rest of the driveway.
Um, from the aerial
photographs,
there is a sidewalk as well, but it
seems like staff had measured only the
driveway, and vehicles that park on the
driveway would not be butdding onto the
sidewalk either. So, this comes down, in
my opinion, this comes down to the
spirit of the law and the letter of the
law. the spirit of the law,
this property does comply with having
adequate space for the parking
requirements that we have instilled.
The issue is is the invisible lie. Now
that is where the letter of the law
comes into play.
My larger concern is how this
development could have
passed all those checks. And it seems
like there the owner had done as much of
her due diligence to check those boxes.
But as we know with property purchases,
there's always things that rear ugly
heads.
I think that these variances come to
council for a reason and that is because
they are case by case determination and
then none of them are the same and it's
up to us to make that decision
and in my opinion this variance I I'm in
support of the variance because
it doesn't actually there is minimal to
no risk of vehicles being parked on the
side of the street that driveway in all
intents and purposes is does comply
except for that invisible eye.
» Thank you. I appreciate you saying that.
My concern is I guess that that might
work for a car if uh we have a truck or
a motor home or um some of the vehicles
could be quite a bit longer and
therefore they would not fit on there
and that was one of the issues that was
brought up the last time. Um, but you're
quite right. It's confusing. We've been
dealing with it for a month and we've
had lots and lots of correspondence
about it. So, is there anybody else who
would like to weigh in on this? Go
ahead, council.
>> Thank you, Madam Mayor. Could I just get
clarity on the width? I'm old school.
Can you do it in footage for me? The
width and the length.
>> Maybe we should ask Miss Dwang. She is
the one who wrote the brief report.
Could we could you clarify that, please?
I am just doing the quick math because I
also don't know it off the top of my
head. [laughter]
So 6.4 m to feet is 20.99 ft.
6.9 m to feet is 22.64t.
» Thank you. Does that help? That would be
sort of a truck.
>> So you feel comfortable if there's three
cars side by side, at least one door in
each vehicle could open in that width.
» So with respect to the measurements
provided, those were actually the
lengths of the driveway itself, not the
actual not the width of the driveway
because the width wasn't what was of uh
potential concern. It was largely the
length.
understand that, but it was presented
that three cars could park there. So, I
just want to make sure we understand the
width and the length.
I do understand about the concern about
the length. That's what we're talking
about the variance.
Do you have any um any um measurements
of the width of the driveway,
Mr. One? Um just looking at the permit
um it appears that the driveway is
approximately 7.2 m in width. Um that's
again approximate because we didn't go
out and measure um
>> the side of the driveway to the other
side of the driveway. Um but a vehicle
parking space is required to be 2.7 m in
width uh as per the zoning bylaw
>> each one. So three times 2.7 m Somebody
got to figure that out quickly. It
doesn't sound like it fits. [laughter]
8.1.
Um, thank you. Is there anyone else who
has a question or a concern?
No, I'm sorry that the this is just
council I'm talking to. Um, councelor
Bennett, would you like to
>> uh Thank you. Yeah. Where I'm a little
bit confused is there's three people
three suites and three cars that are
parked there now. And basically they all
fit the driveway and it seems like most
of all the driveways are the same.
They're all not up to code. They're not
long enough according to this. So if if
there is a fourth car and that car is
parked up in front of the people's in
front of them all the time, I could see
people have been upset. But if these
three cars have been parked there and
they're not in people's road when the
letters I'm reading from here sounds
more like there's a fourth car that's
parked on somebody's drive in somebody's
lawn that's that's parked out on the
street but you're saying it's not.
There's three cars parked in the
driveway. So I'm not sure what exactly
that other car is that fourth car is
that in case another suite comes.
Don't I don't think there was there's
not the two suites. Apparently, there is
the person who lives with the owner has
a ba a basement suite, a basement room.
That's what it sounded like. Who perhaps
has a car and the owner has a car and
the renter has a car. So, that's three.
Yeah. So, I wouldn't probably need four,
right?
>> Anybody else? Go ahead. Councelor
Potter.
>> Thank you. Three to Mong. um in a single
um
in the way this property was originally
built, what would have been the distance
required for the driveway without um any
requirement for um the secondary suite
or a proposed secondary suite?
» Sorry, was the question uh what was the
required length at the time that it was
developed?
>> Length for the depth. Yes. Uh provided
there was no secondary suite or proposal
for secondary suite.
>> So the development would have been
completed prior to the current zoning
bylaw being in existence. I believe uh
zoning bylaw 1085
would have been in place at the time in
which the development um occurred. Um so
with that in mind, there would have been
a reduced parking uh dimension
that would have been applied. Um,
off the top of my head, I'm not sure.
I'm just pulling it up right now.
So, under zoning bylaw 1085, the
required stall depth would have been 5.8
m.
» Okay, thank you. Um but may just
um as I'm trying to sort through this I
think I do share the concern of the um
the owner um that you know they uh
appear to have purchased the property
which they were miss um
that they were led to believe by the
selling realtor that they were
purchasing a property with the legal
suite which in fact it is not. I am re
recognizing that that was done um
originally when they went to proceed to
um require a building permit uh for the
purpose of a short-term rental and now
seeking um this parking amendment for a
um legal secondary suite that would
obviously have to be meet the code. I do
share that frustration with them if that
is the case. Um I do share the concern
of the neighbors that you know um their
conver you know their comments and of
course we can't you know without
physically seeing whether or not what
you know what actually uh fills the
basement of that property um based on
the diagrams um that have been submitted
that's all we have to work with. Um so I
do share both those concerns. However, I
do share the concern also that um you
know the development in existence in
Chara um you know there is various
lengths and depths of the depths of the
parking that's available. Um I did tour
that area last week take a look and see
especially at the proposed property um
that there is concern I think of
vehicles on the overhang as they you
know some definitely could accommodate
that. uh we don't have any knowledge of
any legal or uh secondary suites that we
can verify in that neighborhood and that
is you know obviously another concern
because my my concern moving forward is
how many more situations are we going to
have with this and just the rest of
council I think we got to be a little
cautious as to that consideration moving
forward as to what route we do go down.
» Thank you. Um, so the the lengths
according to the the report range from
4.36 m to 4.53 m. So regardless of which
version of the bylaw, it would not have
been long enough either. So my
frustration is how is this development?
How did it pass all those checks when
like we knew that the driveway wasn't
long enough period?
So
the an error was made somewhere
and I think it's just fair for us to
grant a variance that allows that error
to be somewhat rectified
because if if we're going to, you know,
put the hammer down according to the
bylaw by dimensions, then technically I
guess that development should never have
passed because the driveway was not long
enough period.
So I guess it's what is council's wish
here
>> and I mean it's unfortunate that the
owner has purchased the house house with
the understanding that it was a an
aillegal suite in the basement and in
fact it was not and that is a problem
that I uh maybe it's not her problem but
it definitely is a problem of people who
are selling and filling out the
paperwork for their properties when
things have not been done properly. And
I'm sure that that um I'm hoping that
doesn't happen often or at all, but it
seems to have in this place. Um I I'm
not sure what you would like to do. So,
we have the option of the of uh the
recommended motion on here. Um or um if
that is not appropriate, then do we have
a motion? Somebody like to make put a
motion on the floor.
[clears throat]
Go ahead.
Um, I would like to move uh option
one
that uh the variance be approved but
subject to final inspection to ensure
that there's only one
um [clears throat] suite
in the property.
Thank you.
Have you got that? Um, Mrs. Coulson
or or
Mrs. Robinson. Did you get that? Okay,
thank you. Is there a seconder for that?
[clears throat]
Okay, that was not seconded. Is there a
another uh recommendation? Please
move option two.
>> I got to support our planner here.
Option two is the recommended motion by
the planner.
Thank you. Is there a seconder for that
one?
Thank you. It's been seconded.
Councelor Puerto Rica. Is there any
other comments on this? Then I will call
the question. Um,
all in favor of the recommended motion
against.
Thank you. That was a 3 to2 vote. It
carries.
Um, thank you very much. Thank you, Miss
McCay, for coming in. Um, we appreciate
it. It was a very difficult issue to
deal with.
All right, we will move on to
development variance permit. Um DVP
265460197th
Street.
Um Miss Dwong, do you have this one?
>> Yes. And I do have a presentation for
this one which I will
>> Thank you.
>> try my best to share.
[clears throat]
>> All right. Are you seeing the
presentation on the screen?
>> Yes, we are. Thank you.
>> Perfect. So, I'll go ahead and get
started. Um, so yes, this is uh this
item relates to file number DVP 2605.
Uh, this relates to a property located
at 460197th
Street. So, this is actually the
development that's known as Mojave
Estates. Uh, the OCP designation that
applies to this property is medium
density residential and the zoning that
applies is medium density residential
one sight specific. The property is
approximately 1.41 hectares in size. Um,
and this application actually speaks to
phases 2, three, and four specifically
of the Mojave State Estates development.
Phase one is actually already complete
and is technically a separate parcel
currently. Um, and it includes 12 town
houses.
So, um, I'll just give a bit of a
background since there's been quite a
bit of permit history as council may
recall with respect to this particular
property. So, this starts back in 2022
when a multif family residential
development permit uh number 21-12 was
issued for a multif family residential
development at the property. Then in
2024, building permits were issued uh
for three 4unit townhouse buildings as
well as uh civil works and two retaining
walls at the property. Now, in January
2026, a new medium d or multif family
residential development permit
application was received in order to
revise the site layout and landscaping
plans uh due to changes that were
required uh to be made by the developer
to the internal access roadway.
Following that, in February 2026, a
phase strata develop a plan declaration
for a form P was approved by the
approving officer in order to allow the
development to be completed over four
phases, which kind of explains why the
completed phase is its own parcel
currently. Um once the phases start to
get completed, they'll become
amalgamated um into the last phase until
it's just one property at the end
essentially. Uh so most recently in
March 2026, uh two building permit
applications were received by the town,
each of which were proposing to
construct a 4unit townhouse building, so
eight units in total.
So as council may recall, uh this
property and development have been
before council actually twice since
2024. Specifically, council had adopted
zoning amendment bylaw number 1395.02 2
in 2024 and zoning amendment bylaw
number 1395.12
just last month. Uh both of these
collectively provided sight specific
provisions for the property in order to
allow for secondary suites within duplex
or townhouse dwelling units and to allow
for the construction of one duplex at
the property. These amendments and the
permitting background uh that was just
detailed in the last slide um kind of
just highlight the extensive work that's
been done in the planning and permitting
of this particular development.
So as I mentioned this development is to
be completed in a phased manner with
four phases total. Um at this time it is
understood that the development of the
property is well underway uh with the
access road and servicing which was
within phase one uh being completed as
well as those 12 townhouse units that I
mentioned uh within phase one being
complete. Uh phase 2 is currently in
progress and its completion will see
that eight townhouse units be
constructed and the completion of this
phase is contingent on the subject
variance request uh in order to proceed
as currently proposed.
So specifically the townhouse units
within phase 2 comprise uh garages which
in undertaking a zoning compliance
assessment can only accommodate one
parking space to the minimum dimensions
that are set out in the zoning bylaw.
Now in total there um it is proposed
that eight parking spaces be provided
for the eight dwelling units. So one for
each dwelling unit. While no building
permits have yet been received for the
dwelling units within phases three and
four, it is understood that they would
each contain at least a single car
garage. And as it relates to zoning
bylaw compliance, um it is noted that
zoning bylaw number 1395 uh 2024 uh
requires the provision of 1.5 off
streetet vehicle parking spaces per
dwelling unit specifically for town
houses. So this would equate to actually
a total of 12 parking spaces being
required for the eight townhouse units
in phase 2 and 42 parking spaces being
required for the 28 townhouse units in
phases three and four. Accordingly,
the applicant has requested to reduce
the off- streetet parking requirements
from 1.5 spaces per townhouse dwelling
unit to one. And it should be noted um
that the request encompasses the
remainder of the townhouse uh units that
are proposed within the overarching
development. So, this actually includes
36 townhouse units uh in total within
phases 2, three, and four. Phase one, as
I mentioned, is already built out and is
not included in this request.
So with respect to off- streetet vehicle
parking, it is required to be provided
as a means of ensuring that there is
adequate on-site parking to support the
planned use of a property um and that
public spaces such as street parking are
not supporting private uses. And this
ultimately acts then to mitigate
conflicts that might result from
inadequate site parking provided. Now
with this in mind again we expect that
property owners provide the parking
necessary for use on the property is
intended to be carried out on.
With respect to building stratas uh so
that includes apartments, duplexes and
town houses uh that typically provide
these typically provide parking within
either common property. So that's shared
between property owners or limited
common property which is designated to
specific property owners. So some
examples that we typically see with
respect to parking provided for building
stratas um these include parkades,
surface level parking areas or where you
might have a duplex or townhouse that
has a garage or a driveway um parking
can be provided within those garages or
driveways as limited common property.
It is important to note that of course
while the requirements surrounding the
provision of off- streetet parking serve
an important function when it comes to
conflict prevention and ensuring that
properties are actually able to
accommodate the uses that they're
intended to um support. The imposition
of overly ownorous parking requirements
can hinder development by essentially
limiting the overall site design and
layout as well as buildable area on a
property. Um, so this sentiment was
highlighted in the provincial policy
manual and site standards document which
local governments were required to
consider in the adoption of zoning
bylaws that relate to the delivery of
small-scale multi-unit housing. Uh,
specifically, the province has indicated
that on-site parking requirements uh can
often have the greatest influence on the
viability of small-scale multi-unit
housing forms, especially when you're
considering the small lot sizes that are
found in urban and suburban areas. With
that in mind, the province uh has
encouraged local governments to minimize
parking, particularly in areas where uh
transit options are available. And I do
want to point out that while this
property was not within a restricted
zone at the time in which small scale
multi-unit housing requirements were
included in the local government act, um
this general principle seemed to be
relevant to multif family residential
developments as well.
So in this particular case, it is
understood that the property is located
approximately 250 meters from a bus stop
uh for line 41. Um and this is located
along 89th Street between 97th Street
and Primrose Lane. Uh so that's seen to
provide an alternate uh transportation
option for residents within that
development as it gets built out. As
such, we do see that this is this has
potential to mitigate or reduce
potential negative impacts of a parking
reduction at this particular property.
Additionally, um it is noted um that the
development of this property is greatly
limited. Um and that's largely because
of the previous requirements pertaining
to the way in which the road alignment
was to be designed and requirements for
servicing to be installed. Um, I've
previously mentioned this in our
discussion regarding amendment bylaw
number 1395.12 earlier this year, but as
part of the 2024 building permit
process, the de the developer had uh
previously entered into a servicing
agreement with the town, which had
required that they undertake
construction of the on and off-site
works in accordance with approved civil
drawings. So, the works that were
completed on site included individual
service connections that were based on
the location of the dwelling units as
they were proposed. And with that in
mind, any revisions to the site layout
and building envelopes would likely
require um a fairly lengthy
administrative uh and financially
burdensome processes. [clears throat]
And I did want to just highlight um kind
of just the sight specific context here.
Um, as you can see, I've circled uh the
location of those town houses as they're
to be constructed within phase two. Um,
they are located kind of right up
against the access road, which is seen
to limit how uh their building envelopes
can be altered due to the um higher
elevation of the road and the wall um
that would be right behind these
properties.
So on the other hand, we do recognize
that um council had considered parking
reductions already um during the time in
which the zoning bylaw update project
had taken place. And at that time, off-
streetet parking requirements that were
applicable to townhouse units had been
reduced from 1.75 spaces per townhouse
dwelling unit to 1.5
uh spaces per dwelling unit.
Additionally, and as we've highlighted
previously, the parking requirements
that were adopted in uh the current
version of the zoning bylaw generally
reflect uh the rural environment that
the town is located within. Uh
specifically, there is generally a
greater reliance on private vehicles to
get around and there's a tendency to use
larger vehicles as well.
That said, we do also note that the
zoning bylaw requires 1.5 parking spaces
per apartments and uh townhouse dwelling
units, but actually only requires one
parking space per single detached
dwelling and duplex dwelling unit. Uh
and in fact, the proposed duplex units
within phase three of this same
development would actually only require
one parking space to be provided per
unit, which effectively sets a different
parking standard despite being within
the same overarching development, which
is largely similar in form. Um now,
while greater parking requirements would
generally accommodate visitor parking,
um and the variation in the number of
cars per dwelling, it is noted that the
development does propose uh five visitor
stalls within phase one of the
development.
And lastly, it should be noted that in
response to the referral of this
application on relevant internal
departments, um the fire department had
expressed concerns with respect to the
proposed development uh specifically
that uh there was the potential for
vehicles to encroach into the internal
roadway given the length of the
individual driveways uh being fairly
short and the potential impact then on
congestion and emergency access. Um, but
I do want to highlight that this
variance request does not include a
variance uh for in tandem parking and
therefore the issuance of this variance
as proposed would not expressly permit
vehicles to park in tandem on uh these
individual lots. So with this in mind uh
we are requesting council's direction
with respect to this uh particular DVP
application. Uh for the reasons
previously listed, we are recommending
approval. Um, but council does always
have the option to deny the application
as well. Thank you.
>> U, thank you very much, Miss Dwong. This
is confusing because we have had um this particular um um application come
back several times for variances. Um I
know that it says in your report that
there are five visitor stalls for phase
one. Does that mean that there will be
um visitor stalls as well, the same
number for phases 2, three, and four?
Uh at this time, the developer hasn't
indicated whether there would be
additional visitor parking spaces within
the uh future phases of this
development.
>> That would be interesting to know. And
my concern is cuz I drive by this road
all the time on my way down to my house,
there is one road in and it's not really
visible from the road from the highway.
So you sort of you have to go in and
then go down as shown in the in in the
drawing. Um and obviously just one road
back out um for vehicles. I'm wondering
on the property, are there any other
exits to either walk off of the property
um or do you have to go come back up the
road to the highway in order to walk
along and go down to the to the bus
stop, which is not a 20 minute every 20
minute bus stop. It um it goes a couple
of times a day, I think, and it sort of
depends. Um, so it's not something that
you could count on to get back and forth
um to school or work or or or anything,
I don't think. And my other concern is
that if these all of these um um condos
down here have an accessory suite in the
basement then, which we allowed back
then, then there's a need for obviously
more vehicle parking. I assume one in
the garage and one on the on the the
apron in front. Is that correct? Do you
So, can you answer that question? Is
there any exit off of the property other
than going up the road to the highway?
>> Uh, for that first question, I would
have to refer back to the development
permit plans um to see if there is any
pedestrian access points and pathways.
Um, so I'm not sure off the top of my
head for that one. Uh but with respect
to the secondary suite question, even
though it is permitted by zoning, um
they would still have to prove out the
provision of adequate parking for those
to be actually permitted through the
building permit process. So if there's
not enough space on their individual
like limited common property areas to
provide for a secondary suite parking,
they cannot get a secondary suite.
>> Okay.
>> Thank you. Anybody else? Go ahead.
Councelor Kanger,
>> the road going in and out, is that would
that become a public road in the future
or is that kind of private?
>> That would be a private uh road.
>> So, if there's cars parked in front of
houses and the fire department can't get
by, what do you suppose would happen?
» I'm not sure if I can answer that
question in its entirety. Generally,
when it comes to things like shared
common property strata roads, the
stratas themselves would be responsible
for ensuring um that they're being used
appropriately.
» Who's next?
>> Councelor Puerto Rica.
>> Thank you, Bishop. Um Mr. Wong. Um last
time, um the developer came to council
with regards to secondary suites. um
they were, if I could be wrong here, but
I believe they had said that they had
four off streetet sites per property or
per unit and as we're seeing that
clearly is not the case anymore. Um but
obviously the justified decision for
allowing secondary suites in there. Um
so is there that much of a significant
change over the course? My understanding
is right through from phase one to the
end of phases that they were able to
support for offstream sites per unit.
I'm unclear as to how much the parking
arrangements would have uh changed over
the course of the years. I understand
that phase one would have included
secondary suites. This current phase
does not actually include any secondary
suites within the townhouse units. So
those wouldn't have to be accommodated
in the same way. Um so
and phase three and four have not been
applied for yet. So that would have to
be considered. Um, so it's only in phase
one that they've asked for a secondary
suite. Okay, fair enough. I thank Thank
you. Um, it's still kind of confusing.
Anybody else want to go ahead, counselor
Bennett?
>> I just like to move option number one.
» Is there a seconder for that one?
» You have one more qu.
>> Is there a seconder? You'll second it.
Okay, then you have a question.
» Um, thank you again for you, Mr. Wong.
Just clarification. Um, and I'm just
trying to find the drawing here and it
probably is different.
Um, in one of the renderings here where
it shows the depth of the stalls at
just find that page here
be different for Shannon.
>> The different phases are different.
drawing view and
where it says driveway parking and it
shows a depth of 2.7 m and a width of
5.7. Is that correct?
» And you're referring to the proposed off
street parking plan, correct?
>> Uh this is Yeah. So it's referencing DV
606 of of the actual development permit.
>> Yes. So those are the measurements that
the developer would have provided. But I
do want to be clear that this
application does not request the
allowance for in tandem parking. So you
it wouldn't actually be able to provide
the in tandem parking within that
driveway.
>> Okay.
And go ahead, councelor Chong. And
then with some rough calculations with
page six of six, if you were to extend
the 2.7 to the edge of lane, it would be
approximately only 5 m
roughly if I'm assuming everything is to
scale. Um, which is far below our
requirements regardless.
But uh it seems as council may be in a
bit of a pickle with this variance
seeing as how the previous variance was
denied and they're along the same
spirit.
>> I see it as a different
>> Oh, it's it's
>> a different issue, but never mind. Go
ahead.
>> Zoned RS1, which does allow for a
secondary suite if parking requirements
and all the other requirements um are
fulfilled as well. Um,
this one is is a challenge mainly
because to I guess triple check, there
are no known stipulations for additional
visitor parking stalls uh in the current
plans.
Mong,
>> that's correct. outside of phase one
where they're providing visitor parking.
Um it has not been um we've not been
informed whether there was going to be
visitor parking in the uh remaining
phases,
» but we're working on phase two right
now. Am I correct? So they've obviously
got the okay to do that and there has
been nothing said about visitor parking
in phase two when as when the
development permit was given.
Correct.
» Tricky, isn't it?
[sighs]
Reduce off streetet parking requirements
for townhouse units. So, it's I know
there is and it's been seconded. So,
it's to reduce off-street vehicle
parking requirements for townhouse
units.
Does that mean all of them?
So, we've got some in there right now
and the second phase is being worked on,
but three and four are not.
[sighs]
I don't know.
All right. Are we We don't seem to have
any other questions. So, I'm going to um
to call the question, which is um the
recommended motion that the reduce the
off- streetet vehicle parking limits be
approved. All in favor?
Okay, that has not been approved. Um
that was a 3 to2 vote again and um so my
assumption is that the uh the owner of
the property will need to come back and
have a look at that again. Is that
correct, Miss Dwang?
» I may look to Miss Coulson on this item
in terms of process.
» Yeah, I'm I'm sorry. I'm not prepared
for that question. And the one thing I
will say is that um this property has
been uh disadvantaged in its options
going forward because of that
requirement that was u made at the
outset to pre-ervice all the lots. So
the underground utility is all in place.
Making changes at this point is very
difficult for the developer.
>> Um I yes I read that I get that as well.
I think that there's sounds to me like
there's a couple of other concerns in
here as well off streetet parking which
has not been addressed for something and
so I'd hate to see us say well let's
bring it down um and then we discover
that um there is no off- streetet
parking and there's one road in and out
so I think it's not an easy thing to um
to adopt
all right thank you we have did you have
a question go ahead
So, procedurally, if option one has
if that motion has been struck down, um
does a motion need to be voted on or or
moved in order to move forward with this
case or what happens now?
>> If the developer can bring an alternate
plan forward for council's
consideration, uh we don't need to do
anything further with this.
>> Thank you.
>> Okay. Thank you. We will now move on to
the um Miss Mrs. Keith
the proposed fire department budget.
I have a short presentation for the
proposed budget um for you. Uh so
annually we bring forward the budget
earlier on in the year uh given that
it's um a shared service between
ourselves uh the Indian band and the
rural fire protection district. Just a
little background here um the 2027 to
2031 fire department forecast is built
from the 2026 base budget and applies
category specific inflation assumptions
only. These inflation factors are
applied to the operating revenues and
expenses. The forecast also incorporates
planning for capital projects, reserve
transfers, grant funding, and borrowing
which are identified in the capital
plan.
Revisiting the um the comment made
regarding the shared service. There we
go. Um the fire department provides fire
protection to the town of Aoyus, the
Asus Indian Band and the ASOS fire um
rural fire protection district. Under
the current fire protection agreements,
cost sharing is based on the 2026
assessment values as follows.
We have the town of Aoyus at 59.4%.
The ASOS Indian man sits at 19.3 and the
Assaurus rural fire protection district
at 21.3.
The slide here just talks basically
about the revenue and the funding
forecasts. uh compares throughout 2026
base throughout 2031. Uh for 2027, we
show total revenues at 2.3 million,
which is up 251,000 or 11% compound with
the 2026 base budget. Please keep in
mind this isn't an 11.8% increase. That
includes the capital funding which will
be a transfer from reserves. And you can
see that's up significantly from last
year. Everything else is based purely on
inflation.
The expense forecast is listed here and
it shows a comparison between the 2026
base all the way through to 2031 and
highlighting the larger expense items
which we have our wages and benefits,
our debt charges, and the reserve
contribution. Again, the reserve
contribution just shows what would be
brought out of our reserves to help fund
the capital plan.
into the capital plan timeline. We've
identified uh projects as follows. We
show in 2027 the marine rescue craft
aerial apparatus as well as a command
truck. Uh 2028 we have paving
turnarounds the radio and replacement uh
sorry radio replacement. My good have my
glasses on. It's a little narrow [gasps]
here. Uh 2029 we have fire engine
replacement which is the uh the larger
expenditure we have over the 5-year plan
projection. um 20 the next year we have
2030. We have the uh car 193 rescue uh
replacement as well with nothing planned
at this point for 2031.
Reserve forecast shows what we uh
proposed to contribute to the reserves
and again showing what we're taking out
of reserves to help uh fund those
projects. Um you can see the big dip
there in 2029 which is uh with regards
to the larger fire truck replacement.
Total revenues and expenses both
increased by approximately 251. Again as
in the previous slide uh this 11.8% is
not an actual 11.8% increase but just
showing how we are going to fund uh
capital through our reserves.
Our
budget drivers and considerations are same as every every year. Um wages
and benefits our primary operating
driver for um our annual costs 3.5%. We
have debt charges which remain uh fixed
from year to year from MFA. Uh we have
our reserve contribution which has
increases steadily to help fund our
capital and equipment replacements. Our
capital plan uh planning is based on um
what we can afford uh year after year
through our reserves and any type of
grants we can we can uh receive and in
final review inflation assumptions are
used uh cap capital estimates at this
point grants and reserve funding will be
reviewed before adoption. Adoption for
this budget would occur um as it when
it's amalgamated with our five-year plan
which will be brought forward at the end
of the year.
Uh before council, we have the option to
approve uh and proceed with the proposed
fire department five-year plan or
request change.
» Thank you.
very much. Um this is a
[clears throat] different way of having
it presented that one than we have. So
thank you. This um just it was
interesting to look through and and uh
and see the way that you've presented
it. I appreciate it. Um, is there
anybody who has any questions or
concerns of Mrs. Ke? Go ahead.
Uh, sounds like some pretty big numbers.
Just in layman's term about how much
would it cost the public in a tax
increase from 26 to 27.
>> Currently, we're not showing any type of
tax increase. We're just showing the
inflationary um just the inflation
projections for the next five years. And
that's how we would fund the capital
plan as well as the operating.
>> So it kind of shows 2.8. Have I read it
correct?
>> Correct.
>> Okay. Thank you.
>> Anybody else have any other questions,
concerns? Is there anybody who would
like to go ahead councelor Bennett
>> after after this is done and it's sent
to the So Indian Band as well as
regional district for approval. Right.
Normally what we do is for review we
would take it to um our rural friends
and we would have a small presentation
for them through the the fireh hall as
well as we present it to the sorry man
with the option for them to also join
and to hear the presentation.
» Councelor Chong,
>> thank you. Um so the fire engine
replacement um budget for 2029
it's uh 1.5 million. Is that today's
estimates or is that 2029 estimates for
costing?
>> Yeah. Um through the through the mayor
to councelor Chong those are estimates based on the current apparatus
that we have in our fleet. So the most
recent apparatus that we purchased uh as
well as inflation as estimated or given
to us as an estimate through uh
distributors and manufacturers through
sales folks. So that 1.5 million is a
very good uh I don't want to say guess
but it's a very good estimate at what we
will be looking at spending to replace
our most recent purchase.
And then just for for clarification,
when we do support uh BC Wildfire with
efforts in in wildfire mitigation, um
there is, for lack of a better term,
compensation. Um whereabouts does that
with that fit in in terms of the uh the
budget and the revenue?
>> We do show that and that's in the first
part under recoveries. So, you'll see
our third line on the more detailed
version of the five-year plan forecast.
There's other revenue, fire department
recoveries, and that's whenever we um
visit a scene if there's an event, as
well as any type of support we provide
for for wildfire would go into that
category.
You're welcome.
Okay. Is there somebody who would like
to make a motion here?
Everybody speak up at once here.
[laughter]
Go ahead.
>> I move option one
>> that we approve the proposed fire
department budget. Is are you seconding
that? Are there any other questions,
concerns? I will call a question. All in
favor?
Thank you very much, Mrs. Keith. That
passed.
All right. Next is Mr. Davis, who I'm
assuming is Oh, you're going to do it
for [laughter] Thanks, Sarah. Um, this
is the resort municipality initiative
amendment. Go ahead, please.
>> Yeah. So, I'm bringing forward this
report. Um, as you all know, um, as a
little bit of an executive summary,
we're bringing forward a change to the
2025 through 2027 resort development
strategy. uh we have a three-year
strategy in place and in that time we
had a uh a budget item there of for a
flag replacement which was for $10,000.
Um in further investigation uh in the
background we found that the town
received funding uh a funding request.
Oh, I'm sorry. Going back to the the
actual flag replacement. So it includes
this flag under further uh review. the
flag cost got to be um exorbitant with
that it wasn't our property and after
further review the actual post to the
flag was going to cost a lot more uh to
repair it to make to stabilize a large
flag. So this project hasn't really been
able to go forward just given it is cost
prohibitive. In the meantime, we did
receive a funding request for $8,000 for
fire and ice festival organization from
organizers to help offset the cost of an
outdoor concert to Gyro Park to be held
on the Friday evening of November 27th,
28th, and 29th. The event organizing
committee includes representatives from
Spirit Ridge, Watermark Resort, Asoyas
Art Council, the town of Aoyas, the
Asoyus Museum, and the Asoyas Farmer
Market, and Music in the Park. and the
Asus Arts Council will serve as the
league organizer for the funding
application.
So, we are just requesting we are able
to move that $10,000 funding for the
flag replacement to support this
festival uh through our current
development strategy and uh we have
already checked in with the RMI
community and uh they have no problem
with us changing changing gears on this
one project.
>> Thank you very much. Thank you for
looking into that. Um, anybody have any
questions? Any concerns?
» And it's been seconded by councelor
Chong. All in favor?
Thank you very much.
Okay. Next is the uh Mrs. Coulson, the
Asuous airport management agreement
term.
>> Thank you, your worship. Uh this is this
is the final step in establishing an
agreement between the town and the
Isoyas airport development society or
ODS uh to manage airport operations. Uh
council heard uh from the former CEO in
October 2025 when council approved
entering into a one-year agreement for
the management of the airport with ODS.
U the execution of the uh agreement was
postponed while ODS uh secured some
documents that were required for the
agreement. Um, so, uh, now that we're at
the point a year later that we are
wishing to execute the agreement, ODS is
asking if they can have a 2-year rather
than a one-year term. This will help
them establish the services uh, more
securely and uh, importantly, it g it
places them well when they apply for a
grant. They have a term long enough to
be able to apply for the grant,
hopefully get the grant, and complete
the work that's grant funded. So, it is
recommended that we approve um the
two-year term for the agreement.
>> Can I just ask a question? So, um it
would be once we okay this or whatever
we Okay, is this starting date is that
date and it goes for two week two years
after that. Thank you. Just wanted to
check. Go ahead.
>> I'm just going to move option one.
>> Is there a seconder? Councelor King.
Okay. Go ahead.
>> Does it go back to 25 26 27 or we go 26
27 28?
>> Uh it would be two years from the time
we signed the agreements.
>> Okay. So like moving forward now two
more. Yeah. Thank you.
>> Okay. Is there any other concerns about
this? Um call question. All in favor?
>> Thank you. That's carried.
>> Um next water conservation plan update
report.
Um, Mrs. Coulson, thank you.
>> Got my name on it. Um, but we're pleased
to have our engineer, Steve Underwood
from True Consulting with us today. And,
um, Mr. Underwood is going to present
council with a water conservation plan
update.
>> Thank you. Please go ahead, Steve.
» Yeah. So, Um, last fall we prepared an
update to the water conservation plan.
Um, it's been in a draft form for too
long and for so now we finally got it
here today to uh present to council
hopefully um have it endorsed. Having an
endor a council endorsed water
conservation plan is usually a
requirement of grant funding
applications. Um new requirements are
also that these uh conservation plans
contain actual targets like values that
are measurable and that there's a method
in which we um propose to report our
compliance with them and or you know
achieving our targets. So this new plan
um while your last plan did have a
target, we didn't really check in on it
um very regularly or at all. Um and and
so this plan actually gives you targets
for the next for every 5 years for for
moving forward for the next foreseeable
future.
The other big thing that this plan's
going to do for you is inform the sizing
of your water treatment plant project.
Uh right now your water treatment plant
is proposed to be a $51 million water
treatment plant. That's without the
intake. $65 million a width in intake,
but the actual plant facility itself is
51 million and its capacity is 24.7
megaliters per day.
What we're proposing in this water
conservation plan is that we reduce that
number from 24 to 17 through
conservation.
And really the uh 54 or 51 million
scales with with that. So that's like a
28% reduction in what in the size of the
plant and it corresponds generally not
exactly but to a 28% reduction in the
cost of the plant. Um and really when we
look at this this is MDD so that's
maximum day demand. That is the plant
has to be sized to be able to meet our
maximum day demand every um day in the
summer. Um, our current demand this year
has peaked out at 14 MLDD. So, we're currently well under that number,
but we're under some pretty serious
restrictions. Since our new restrictions
came in, we've actually dropped it down
to 12 or 11 since August 1st. So, we're well under the numbers already
with the measures that we put in place
that we're proposing.
But we're also proposing that as
population grows that we continue to
reduce our per capita demand.
Right now um our 5year trailing average
day demand so add is 1,044
liters per capita per day. Um we we've
chosen that as a metric for our targets
mainly because most other jurisdictions
report that as well. like we can go into
everyone else's annual water reports and
find out what their um annual average um
daily demand is per capita. Um there's
Canadian averages published, there's BC
averages, there's lower mainland like
the Canadian average is 320 liters per
capita per day add. We're at,044.
But our MDD is what's really important
to us. Um for the last 20 years it's
almost exactly at 2.4 44 multiplier for
our ADD to MDD
and it's been it's been that way every
year. So we by targeting a reduction in
ADD will see a a corresponding reduction
in MDD and and MDD is actually what
drives um the sizing of our plant. So
managing MDD is most important to us but
all the targets I tell you in here are
actually add targets. Moving forward, we
could come up with some goals to try and
reduce that multiplier of 2.44. Um, but
that that would achieve the same thing
as trying to make our treatment plant
smaller.
Another note is that, you know, this
plan targets, you know, water treatment
plant size in the 17 range and our wells
can provide 17.2. So, our it's kind of
within the range of our current ability
to supply water as well.
Within the water conservation plan, um
there's kind of like three different
options that were analyzed for what we
think growth could be and and what our
um demand reduction could be. This graph
is is of the recommended option, which
is to assume that growth is going to be
what the average growth has been in the
Okonogan for the last 20 years, which is
1.3%.
Um there's lots of other studies that
have been done that use higher growth
factors, but what we're trying to say is
here's a realistic one. Like let's plan
on a on actual numbers, not these two
and three and 4% growth because they compound annually. And so it's a
1.3%
growth um coupled with a 1.7%
annual reduction in ADD. So what we're
saying is every year people need to save
1.7% of their water uh from the last
year and our demand will slowly drop
kind of as this graph shows. Uh that's I
guess the laser pointer there's a middle
line there where you see an immediate
drop of like 20% and then it goes flat.
That's actually more likely what's going
to happen as we start reading our
meters. We're probably going to actually
see a significant drop. will go below
our current goals and we can report that we're below our goals and then we
don't have to pull any other levers on
conservation
immediately. We just have to keep our
eyes on our goals and know that you know
we're well as we reapproach our uh
future goals that we might have to pull
other levers to to achieve them.
This graph shows it on the MDD um chart.
I'm going to flip to it because I'm
having troubles reading those numbers.
But uh you can see that uh our current
MDD has has fluctuated you know previous
to 2026
somewhere between the high 14s and you
know 17 or 18. Um and that's our
historic MDD.
it has trended down u even as we've
grown our the trend line has been
slightly down so things have been
working uh we have been doing public
education we have metered our major
users we have done a lot of things over
the years um moving forward we're going
to see a a larger reduction with our new
metering and and we now have really
clear data on what's happening with our
water we we know, frankly, who's using
water every day of the week because we
can we can record that if we want and we
know who's complying with our irrigation
restrictions and how many people aren't.
Um we know um generally where all the
water is going. um except
when we look at you know how much we're
reading and how much um how much we're
pumping there is maybe between two and
three megaliters a day that we haven't
accounted for yet in our metering
program. So that is something that it's
another lever we can pull. we can try
and look for it and and see what we can
do to to explain that water, whether
it's leakage or whether it's being used
on unmetered services that may be town
um properties that we hadn't uh or parks
that we haven't metered yet. Um and so
that is something that we can look at.
But as we as we achieve these goals, the demand we're projecting the demand
to actually drop over the next 20 years
down into the 14 range and it may even
be lower, like we may even get down to
12. Um and and then there'll be a limit
where we our residents can't necessarily
conserve more. Um there there won't be
as it won't be as easy to dial back the
lawn irrigation or change out fixtures
or whatever. and and then the demand
will start to increase as population
goes up because these graphs show us
going down till we hit that target which
is in the water conservation plan of six
an add of 600 L per capita per day and
then once we get there we don't show any
additional uh conservation past that so
it does creep up and so by 2080
the year 2080 if we use the you know the
1.3% growth model we hit a treatment
plant design of 17.4
um which is many years out like planning
for a size of that is very reasonable
and there will be growth obviously to
trigger that 1.3% growth there'll be
dcc's and stuff collected in that time
that will pay for these plant
expansions. So what we're proposing here
is if we can adopt these targets that we
can plan this plant for 50 years knowing
that uh we only have to um build it to a
17 capacity.
If the growth was 2%
um you can see that it does go up to
that 24 number which is the green line
on this chart by uh by the year 2080. Um
the original idea behind the 2.4 or 24
megal liters a day plant sizing was no
conservation. So like the the reason
that number was chosen was assuming that
we weren't capable of conserving
anymore. But what we're now saying is we
have to conserve. We have to drive this
down to try and reduce the cost of this
flat to make things affordable.
So, our recommendations um out of this
report um is that council endorse the
[snorts] report and its recommendation
to target um demand reduction in five
year the five-year targets down to 600 L
per capita ADD.
Um we also recommend that you maintain
your current
um metered rate structure. If you have a
metered rate structure, we want to
recommend that you um you know
transition your users to it and start
charging volutrically based on
consumption per your current uh rate
structure.
Um we have noticed lots of major water
users and it sounds like um staff have
already been investigating them. We can
like I said we can read the data. We've
been True has been reading your meter
data daily. We've been tracking it daily
by address to get an idea of of you know
where and how our water is using and
there is some major users out in normal
neighborhoods. Um and so public work
should visit them. Uh some of them are
consuming 30 cubic meters a night. Like
that's 30,000 liters in in one day. Um
so we do need to figure out where that
water is going. Could be the meters
installed wrong. Like it doesn't mean
they're actually doing it. uh we need to
understand some of these anomalies and
um and get to the bottom of them because
um basically your top 100 users are
using 25% of your water according to the
data and so we need to get on those
um
as we move forward. I don't think we'll
have to do much more than at the
beginning than just start billing by
metered rates. But there the re the
report does recommend other levers you
can pull by like giving rebates for
irrigation controllers um you know
different targeted rebate programs. We
wouldn't propose to put anything in next
year's budget or likely the year after's
budget for any programs like that. That
would be something that that staff could
bring forward at a future date if we're
trying to get to a goal and we just
haven't been able to get there that we
look at we analyze our data where our
water is going and then try and choose
programs that might uh be able to reduce
those numbers down. But the most
important recommendation here is that we
report our progress annually. We're
proposing to add a section to the at
least the water annual water report that
just is conservation where we revisit
these targets. We check that we're um
working towards them because if we're
not our plant will not if and we build a
plant down to 17 uh our plant won't be
large enough to meet our growth
projections. So we will either have to
start um budgeting for a plant expansion
or start reducing our demand. Um, so
constantly looking back at these targets
and where our progress is to them is the
best thing that we can do and take them
seriously. Once we've built a plant
that's that this size, we will have to
make sure we achieve this.
» That concludes my report.
>> Thank you, Steve. Um that was that was
quite interesting to read the whole
report and see where we can what we have
done and what we can do and we don't
know what we can do until we have the
information and that's why water
metering is so important because we do
get that a lot more information now did
that did they go through the same
concerns when this was done in Oliver
when they did it a while back where same
size community sort mostly although we
get a lot more visitors I think than
they do that.
>> Yeah. So Oliver saw a 40% reduction in
water demand almost immediately with the
installation of meters. Oliver at the
same time had um their two largest wells
become contaminated with uranium. and
Oliver was able to simply turn them off
and was able to supply water to their
customers for many years with their two
largest sources offline because of their
metering that came in in '07.
>> Wow.
>> And they've kept it down. They've done a
good job. They have had to add one new
source since then to replace one of the
two that have come down, but they are in
a a really good supply situation. The
other thing Oliver was able to do was
defer a sewage treatment plant upgrade
by 40 years with this. Again, the same
reduction in water demand created a
corresponding reduction in sewer demand
and and made their current plant size
reach, you know, 40 years beyond where
it thought we thought it was going to be
able to go.
That's good to hear because um when when
we always hear bad news and what's going
wrong, it's nice to know that we there
are things we can do to um to make this
work well. Good. Thank you, Councelor
King.
>> Yeah. Thank you, Madam. I have two or
three questions. One would be I think
you should report every 6 months instead
of a year because I think a year would
be past what we might need to know. And
I just want a clarity. You said maybe a
100 people consume 25% of the water. Who
goes out and talks to them? I just
wanted clarity on that.
» Mark, do you have the answer to who's
going?
>> Yeah, we we've had people from our
waterworks division go out as they have
time. Uh starting with the top users
that we can't explain where the water is
going. They're they're just working
through them kind of one address at a
time. But also if they choose not to cut
back, they just will pay a lot more.
>> That will be the end result. Yes. But in
the interim, they're ruling out, as Mr.
Underwood said, the possibility of a
malfunction in the meter. And if they
talk to them and say, "Yes, we are using
30,000 LERs a night." Then we know
there's no malfunction. It's their
choice.
>> I guess one last question. Can you
explain to me the difference between a a
portable water treatment plant and a
portable W water filter system?
>> I would say there's probably no
difference. Like it I think that's just
a terminology question, but a port a
portable water treatment plant would
just be something that's likely been
containerized that we you could pick up
and move. Um they're common in the
mining camps up in the north. You would
kind of order one from somewhere. The
size of them aren't usually at the scale
that we're talking here. We're not like
uh when we talk 17 megaliters a day or
25 megaliters a day, you don't usually
see a portable one that's that size,
» councelor Chong.
>> Thank you. [clears throat]
Not going to try to hog the mic here,
but um with the per capita calculation
is the the population that's used for
the denominator is that the 55 56
population that's reported by census.
>> Yeah. Um so it's it's plus the rural
area. So it's it's so it's more like a
6,000 and something denominator. And I
acknowledge it's not necessarily fair uh
because of the tourist influx here. And
so I I think we always have to keep that
in mind that when I say your neighboring
community has a per capita demand of
500, which some of your neighbors do,
and you're at a thousand, um you're also talking about the water
consumption that comes from um your
tourist population. So your residents
are being punished by saying you know
their demand is it the tourist demand is
on to your 6,000 residents.
Then to get higher resolution data
there's we can differentiate the meter
data based on the size of the meter. So
most residences are I forgot the the
width but we can just parse data from
them and but also see what stratas or
hotels and motel are also using right
>> yeah so one way easy way to sort our
data is by meter size so we can sort it
by 3/4 in andor 5/8 meters and see what
that generally represents our residents
so we can see what they're using and we
can totalize that easily and yes each
address so strata uh you know has a
number of units associated with it. So
we do know which ones are stratas and
how much the individual stratas are
using kind of per unit but we don't know
how much has been used in the individual
units because we just measure the strata
at the property line. So, since we've
been collecting data, excuse
[clears throat] me, since the uh the
water meters are installed, is there a
better way to kind of calculate what our
per capita usage is based on the meter
size, which mostly
pertains to residential and there's some
commercial in there as well, right?
>> Yeah. So, and it comes down to the
target like the target is just an add um
that is a simple calculation. Um but
yes, we could do high resolution
um data crunching for you to say what
our residents are actually using, but
the people we're benchmarking ourselves
against like the city of Pentictton
aren't doing that, right? So their
number I think last year was 585 liters
per capita per day um that they have a
similar tourist influx. Maybe not as but
we'd have to like see what the
comparison is but they've have managed
to get their number significantly lower
than you've managed to get your number
and and and the reason we've chosen that
add is is more just that benchmarking
between uh us and and like the Canadian
average which is 320.
» Um thank you water counselors. Any
concerns questions from you guys? Okay.
I've just wondered. Um, so what we're um
what the recommended motion is that we
adopt the 2025 water conservation plan
update um and direct staff to begin
researching the implementation of the
strategies incorporating the future capital and operational work
plans for the town of Isuyas. Is there
somebody
>> Thank you. seconded. It's been moved and
seconded.
Absolutely. Go ahead.
>> Thank you. [clears throat] Is there an
opportunity to do to obviously want to
start with education? Um is there a
possibility to do a quarterly like
billing mock cycle if we were to use our
current fee structure just to show the average household like this is what
it would cost
according to and this is how much you
you've used. Just so that it gives them
some context.
Yes, we we trying to figure out how to
word this properly. Um, so we do have
the water consumption and of course you
saw that we have implemented the portal
which allows uh our 360 portal allows
people and residents to sign up see
their cons their consumption in real
time. Um we any type of questions we do
get we have um put out kind of
communication through our um e-news and
website of what the rates currently are
today uh based on if it were metered and
given them kind of like a calculation
matrix like take your base plus your per cap you know your per per cubic
meter per the price and that's what your
bill would be. Um we have not been in a
position to do mock billing although
that had been discussed just given um we
are still haven't completed the whole
phase of installation of of meters. We
still have a few out there and we're
still working and troubleshooting
through a couple other issues with the
meters but um um yeah over overall we we
can highlight it I guess more on a
website more of a general this is a
formula to calculate it if that kind of
answers your question.
So, um I think one of the things on our
website when you go on right away is the
water advisory and there's quite a lot
of of information on it um right right
away that you can get. I think maybe we
need to do something similar to put on
the website uh about water conservation.
And I know it it I mean this is a big
report that we've got, but if we could
have something that would give a a two
or three pager on on what we're talking
about here, it's a lot to absorb. I
think that would be helpful and it's
something we could direct people who are
concerned to go and and read.
>> Yes. Go ahead.
>> Yes. And I think it would be important
to try to encourage more people to sign
up to my 360. I've been going on regular
and looking at it and it's quite
interesting. It's really simple to use.
You only really got to push a couple
buttons after you've logged on. So, you
can see your own consumption and I think
a lot of people be happy and maybe
there'll be a few people unhappy but it
is quite accurate on reading your own
meter. It's kind of exciting to do that.
>> We have launched um when we launched the
program, we did put out a various
different e-newses and on our Facebook
and on the website here's instructions
on how to do it. We we help people here
in the office. If they come to the front
desk, we'll help sign them up for it. Um
and then on this latest quarterly
billing, we did put a section right on
the bottom that we do encourage you to
see your, you know, to sign up so you
can see your daily consumption.
>> Question.
>> Thank you to you and through you
director Keith. Do we know roughly how
many we've had um register or subscribe
to that data?
>> I think we're up to over 200 now.
>> Thank you. Yeah.
>> Okay. So, we have had a mover and a
seconder on the recommended motion. Um I will call for the question. All in
favor?
Thank you. And that was unanimous. All
seven. Thank you very much.
Steve, for um
providing that for us. Next, we're going
on to bylaws. Uh zoning amendment um
bylaw. Um yeah, zoning bylaw amendment
for 28 Empire Street. Is that Miss Dwong
again? Good. Thank you, Miss Dwong. Go
ahead, please.
>> We'll do. And I do have a quick
presentation for this one.
Mhm. [clears throat]
>> And
see,
and is the slide coming up on your side?
>> Yes, we can see it. Thank you.
>> All right, perfect. So, uh just a quick
heads up on this one. I am presenting uh
the overview of this application,
although um I do have Colin Martin also
with me in the room, um who is the file
manager for this application, just in
case any questions come up at the end.
Um but with that, I'll just go ahead and
get started.
So, this is a zoning uh bylaw amendment
application for the property at 28
Empire Street. The OCP designation that
applies to this property is industrial
and it has a corresponding zoning of
general industrial. The parcel is just
over 4,000 square meters in size and is
currently understood to contain an auto
body shop as well as an automotive
museum.
So the automotive museum is actually the
subject of this resoning application as
the applicant is proposing to operate an
indoor automotive tourist uh attraction
uh being the desert speed heritage
museum at the subject property. It is
understood that the museum is currently
operating.
the general industrial or I1 zone and
that applies to this property is
intended to support a variety of
industrial uses and that includes um
various uses um including but not
limited to construction supply center
manufacturing salvage operation service
industry establishment and vehicle sales
and rental. Now um museums um are
actually not permitted within the zone.
So despite being um currently in
operation, this is not an outright
permitted use within the I1 zone and
they're actually only permitted within
the administrative and institutional and
town center zones throughout the town.
As such, the applicant is requesting to
amend the zoning of the applica of the
property under the town's uh zoning
bylaw uh from general industrial to
general industrial site specific in
order to allow cultural facility as a
permitted principal use and specifically
that that be in the form of a museum.
Now, in considering this proposal, staff
do note that industrial lands within the
town are limited to those lands in the
uh Buenov Vista Industrial Park, which
is located at the northwest corner of
the town. expansion of these lands is
greatly limited by uh just its location
uh specifically jurisdictional
boundaries as it's located right at the
border of the town and electoral area A
of the RDOS. It's also bounded by
existing industrial and non-industrial
development as well as competing land
uses such as those lands that are
located to the south uh which are
designated under the OCP for
environmental conservation purposes.
>> [snorts]
>> Now, the OCP sets out intended use uh
the intended use of industrial lands as
being to support light and heavy
industrial uses and this is reflected in
the town's zoning bylaw by way of
permitted uses within the general
industrial zone. Now, general industrial
uses uh or non-industrial uses are those
which are typically not seen to be
compatible with industrial uses are not
permitted within this zone and would
otherwise require the discretionary
approval on a case-byase basis through a
reszoning process just like this one.
Now, in these instances, council can
assess whether a proposed use is
appropriate within the context of the
industrial designation and whether it's
an effective use of land uh in the
industrial area.
So, in this particular case, the request
is understood to allow an automotive
museum in addition to all other uses
which would normally be permitted within
the I1 zone. So in this regard, the
property owner would be maintaining
their ability to undertake all other
forms of industrial uses which are
currently permitted in the I1 zone even
if the reszoning is approved.
Additionally, the museum is focused on
automobiles and relates to an existing
principal auto body shop at the property
which would reduce the overall
likelihood that users would be affected
by any typical negative impacts of being
near industrial sites uh such as
nuisances like noise and air quality. As
such, we do see that the proposal is
generally seen to be compatible with the
existing industrial use of the property
and wouldn't be hindering its use for
industrial purposes into the future.
We do also recognize that as a resort
municipality, the town does face unique
challenges um with respect to how it can
balance year-round businesses with
tourism priorities. The OCP does contain
supportive policy which encourages the
expansion of the attractiveness of the
town year round and prioritizes
attracting new businesses. But it is
also recognized that of course uh there
is limited industrial land and the OCP
then supports um the infill and
redevelopment of underutilized
industrial uh properties. In response to
this, as the proposal is seen to provide
for an indoor year-round attraction, u
it does appear to be consistent with the
town's priority to support year-round
tourism and a year-round economy.
On the other hand, and as mentioned,
industrial lands within the town are
very limited, and there may be more
appropriate locations to site and
operate a museum. As mentioned, cultural
facilities are typically found within
the administrative and institutional
zone where they're permitted outright.
But these lands are also very limited
and are generally already occupied by
existing uses, which makes it quite
challenging to identify other suitable
administrative and institutional lands
for the proposed use. Uh that being said
though, the applicant may have
opportunities to identify town center
zone lands within the downtown core,
which could also permit uh cultural
facilities as well.
So, at this time, we are uh requesting
council's direction with respect to the
proposed bylaw amendment and further
reasons uh provided. We are um
recommending that the amendment bylaw be
read a first and second time and proceed
to public hearing on September 8th uh
2026. Um should the reasonzoning be
successful if council supportive of it,
a change of use permit may be required.
Um and improvements may also be required
to satisfy BC building code
requirements. Thank you.
>> Thank you very much, Miss Dwang. I
appreciate that. Go ahead, Council.
>> Great presentation. Thank you very much.
I'll move option one
>> and it's been seconded
and yes, go ahead for a question. Yeah,
>> thank you. You too, Mr. Um, does the um
zoning by amendment does that uh change
the parking requirements for the
property? Would those stay the same?
Um it would the use itself is what
triggers the parking requirements. So
that's not altering parking requirements
at the site. Um cultural facilities have
their own parking requirements under the
zoning bylaw and those would need to be
met um in order for the use to take
place.
>> Thank you.
>> Okay. So, it's for uh it's the the
entire recommendation that that be read
a first and second time and that there
be a a scheduled um uh open public
meeting public hearing on September the
8th and that staff give notice to the
public hearing in accordance with the
recommendations. That's what we're
voting on. All right. All in favor
against? No. Thank you very much. That
car
Sorry, we will now have um a chief
administrative officer report. This is
>> uh in community services, the park
benches and picnic tables have been
ordered for Metoark Park and
Playgrounds, which good news for lots of
people. and the outdoor uh fitness
equipment has been ordered as well. The
cactus kids day camp is slowly winding
down. The leaders have done a great job
in entertaining the kids despite not
being able to go outside due to the
smoke. And the last day of camp is on
August 21st. Fall program planning is
underway and staff are looking to put in
new programs in response to the program
survey that was online and many of our
residents responded to. At Sun Bowl, ice
times are filling up with both scheduled
hockey events and with private users. In
corporate services, the front counter
staff are fielding calls as Miss Keith
mentioned uh about setting up the My 360
online water monitoring app. And uh as
we also mentioned, there is been about
200 residents register for the free
service already. Bylaw officers are w
issuing watering tickets now and
following up on boats and sidus that
have been parked on the town's beaches.
Parking tickets were suspended during
the period of time of some fire evacuees
being in town. Um they were taking
refuge on our street. So we suspended
all parking tickets for the for that
period of time.
Uh preparations for the election are
well underway now with the development
of forms and the assembly of mail ballot
packages minus the ballot of course and
uh initial testing of the automated vote
counting machines. Uh I want to
highlight the fact that nominations for
candidacy uh in the upcoming election
will be formally accepted between the
statutory dates and times of September
1st at 9:00 a.m. and September 11th at
400 p.m. Anyone considering running in
the election must submit those forms to
the chief election officer Amy Robinson
or her designate between those times for
their names to appear on the ballot.
Also for those who may be considering
candid candidacies but wish to know more
uh please feel free to come into the
municipal office talk to the election
officers or to any of the current
elected officials whether it be in a
Soyas or another jurisdiction. We really
recommend firsttime candidates to have a
full understanding of what it's like to
be an elected official. Um, there's also
a number of great videos that were
produced by the province of BC on the
town's website under 2006 election and
information for candidates that walk
through all the aspects of being an
elected official. In the communications
area, uh, on Facebook, we now have 94
followers and there have been 30 posts
since the last update and 35,000 page
views. uh websites had 28,000 views
since the last report and our parking
survey results are live and online on
that survey page. If anybody hasn't had
a look at them, we had over 600
responses and lots and lots of great
feedback.
Uh the water conservation survey has
just closed, so those results will be up
shortly and there was over 200 responses
to that. In the planning and development
services, business licenses issued since
the last update are the Palmus Kitchen
and Bar at the Holiday Inn, Oracle Real
Realy, which is home occupation, LS
Sports and Entertainment for the Isoyas
Coyotes, and a numbered company uh
2179639
Alberta, which is a home occupation for
painting. Six residential building
permits were issued during the month of
July in the amount of $1,460,000.
Uh the building official has posted two
stop work orders on residential
properties that were either building or
renovating without permits. The planning
department also issued three preliminary
layout reviews uh for sub subdivision
applicants. So things are really ramping
up in the in the planning area. Finally,
for planning, we did get confirmation
from the ALC that they have received our
application for the block exclusion and
they have cautioned us that they are
facing staffing shortages. So, they're
um they anticipate there will be delays
in processing that for financial
services. Quarter 3 utilities billings
were issued on August 14th and the bills
will show water consumption for um for
clients information only. The town
continues to encourage residents to sign
up for my 360 in order to have that
real-time water consumption information
and uh they can go to either a soyc.ca
there's step-by-step instructions or
call the town office or come in for
assistance in signing up. 2027 budget
planning is underway with the fire
department and sunbo budgets coming
forward to council for the August and
September meetings respectively. fire
department. Over the first six months of
the year, Soy Fire Department responded
to 34% fewer calls for service than over
the same period of time last year. But
it's important to note that when
comparing July, just the one month of
July, 2026 to 25, the calls have
increased by 20%. So it's it's variable.
uh town the autonomous waste fire
department has been assisting
firefighting efforts throughout the
region from August 7th to the 16th. The
fire department worked alongside other
fire departments from across the
province in protecting the town of
Summerland. The fire department has also
provided standby coverage to the BC
Wildfire Service for the Southern
Okonogan for the past two weeks. This
week, the fire department anticipates
receiving a shipment of face coverings
from the Canadian Red Cross to assist
people in the community that are feeling
the impacts of the smoke. These
coverings will be distributed throughout
the community for both visitors and
residents free of charge.
Finally, in operational services, public
works department has received the
replacement fountain pump. We've noticed
our our down at Pioneer Walkway, the the
fountain is not working right now. Um we
will be installing the new pump in the
fall. Quail place capital works are
complete and phase one of the 89th
Street construction is uh paved and um
nearing completion. Uh director of
operations Tyler Madison Madson, I'm
sorry, has left his position with the town to take a position as CEO in
Liilowette. So we wish him all the best
in his new job. And we're very pleased
to have Deputy Director of Operational
Services, Jill Abney, acting as
director.
» Thank you, Risha. Thank you very much.
And thank you, Jill, for stepping in.
Appreciate it. Um,
>> did you have a question? Sure.
>> Just one question. Has the town received
any update if the musical right is
moving forward this Saturday or has it
been cancelled?
As far as I know, it's it's uh it's
still scheduled to
>> Okay. Thank you.
>> And it's Sunday,
>> not Saturday.
>> But [laughter]
[gasps] okay. Um can we go to council?
Oh, we need to receive the CEO report
for information, please. Thank you,
Councelor Puerto Rica. Councelor King.
All in favor? Thank you. Okay, councelor
King, you're next. Yeah, not too much to
report other than I guess people might
know my wife he ordered her back. So now
I become the chief cook and bottle
washer.
>> Do you make cookies too?
>> Yeah. [laughter]
» Good. Okay. Thank you, Councelor
Bennett.
>> I have nothing to report for this
meeting. Thank you,
>> Councelor Chong.
>> I have something to report.
>> Oh.
Uh oh. What did you win?
>> A so every year Assus and in Assus Golf
Club and Incom Golf Club play against
each other for the Ryder Cup and I'm
happy to announce that Assus has won two
years in a row. [gasps]
So just wanted to gloat a bit. So thank
you to all the staff from both Inkam
Golf Course and Assus Golf Club for all
the hard work they do. And uh also thank
you head pro Matt for the pity pick of
me for being on the team.
» Terrific. Thank you councelor Potter
Rica.
>> Uh worship no trophies this week but uh on July 29th attended yourself. Um
the um Suz Center had the official
ribbon cutting and unveiling of their
new accessible washroom project uh which
has added two uh fully wheelchair
accessible uh washroom stalls um to
their uh center. Uh a great addition
there obviously um as part of the
accessibility improvements have been
made over the last couple years uh to
the property uh allowing uh more
visitors um easier access to the
property. And aside from that, just some
meetings with I've had some recent
meetings with regards to the fire and
ice festival uh currently planned for uh
later this year. And that's my report.
>> Thank you. So um yeah, I have a couple
things. Um one, I was also at the Desert
Center um opening of the of the very
nice washrooms which used to be at 7710,
our property. uh and um it was well
attended and despite the fact there was
smoke um it was um there were quite a
few people there so appreciate being
invited to that. Um I've been on several
RDOS meetings, regional district
meetings. Um I do get updates
two or three times a day on fire issues
in the regional district and I know that
there that certainly that's available on
all the news media. So including um uh
updates from our fire chief as well on
not necessarily the ones uh close to
Summerland but mostly the ones across
the line that we're still dealing with.
them and we seem to have a few more. So,
that's been a lot. Um, recently um I
have also been on EMCR, that's emergency
management, climate readiness meetings
um uh probably every two weeks,
sometimes it's every week, just updates
on um the river forecast, the wildfires,
and how many um how many there are and
where they are. And that information is
pretty available to everybody too. But I
do attend those ones. Um the the meeting
that we had um here um we had an an
invitation from uh Walrus, the water uh
land and resource stewardship um
minister to um attend a meeting in
Assuyas and uh talk to um us about um
some of the big concerns that they that
they had were drought um and drought
preparation.
and response. Um and also um agriculture
was another one of their issues that
they wanted to talk about and also um
their uh department have also taken on
zebra kaga muscles. So they they know
that um that I have been involved with
that for many years with Okonogan Basin
Water Board and the Okonogan Basin Water
Board um three of them from uh attended
the meeting as well. So um uh Mrs.
Coulson very kindly put out some water
resource management briefing um notes
and I have some here for council um for
them to um to have a look at. um she was
here and her staff for um an hour and a
half or so and we had a good
conversation about about water issues
and what we're doing um in the town of
Asuyus to help things and of course
Okonogan Basin Water Board also um gave
the gave some information for that one.
Um I know that it was mentioned this
morning the [clears throat] Etsy BC
grant that um destination is Suya Scott.
Um the new grant application time is
September 1st to October the 8th 2026.
So that goes for everybody in the
Thompson Okonogan and the Columbia
Coupney region to apply for grants. I
can provide information on that, but
there's a lot of information online as
well. Of course, we've been dealing with
a lot of of um of water issues um not
only in the town, but u reducing our our
um water down to one day a week. It's I
think it's it's made quite a difference
to people to think, how am I going to do
this? Um because you can only water your
lawns. um once a week. But I do know
that um Sigree Kendrick, who is the
Okonogan Zeroscape Association
um executive director, has pointed out
that do handwatering
um with your plants because save those.
They if your lawn goes golden, that will
come back at some point. But um make
sure that you hand water. So, in the
morning, I've got my bucket and I'm out
watering my plants and my couple of
tomato plants. So, um we certainly
recommend that people take it seriously
and remember we had um suggested at the
last meeting that if anybody had any
good ideas on how to um save water or um
they should come up with it. So, a
friend of mine said to me, you know,
when I get in the shower in the morning,
I have a bucket in there because I'm not
ready to step into the shower until it's
warm enough to get into. So, I save that uh water in your in my bucket and I
then take it out after. And I thought,
"Wow, I hadn't thought of that one, but
that's a good one." I think that the
other thing is better uses of gray
water. And we we probably need to put
that into um into our thinking as well.
And having rain barrels and I know we've
had no rain, but um occasionally when we
do get um uh rain, it's quite easy to
collect um stuff in a rain barrel. So
those are all ideas that we need to come
up with. And um and the other thing that
I want to mention is the rolling barrage
which is a coast to coast ride
motorcyclists um they're come across
Canada. It's the 10th annual and they're
coming to combat uh PTSD and they're
coming through OSUS on Friday afternoon.
That's the 21st from 4:00 till 5:15 I
believe. and they're going to be at what
I call the husky um the co-op up beside
the visitors center and um they have
asked that anybody who would like to
come out and support them uh please do
so. So council, if I will certainly be
there, if any of you want to um to join
and come out and support these people,
there are then on their way to Princeton
and then to Vancouver. But um this is
being handled by um our fire chief uh
Chief Cook. And I'm just wondering if
you could give us a little bit more
information on this, please.
>> Uh thank you, Madam Mayor. Actually, you uh you touched on many of the uh the
main points uh with this ride coming
through town. Uh what I can add is that
it's estimated between 150 to 200
motorcyclists will be entering town on
along Highway 3 from the east. Uh the
Soyuse Fire Department, uh we will have
apparatus on the east side of town to
welcome everyone in. And then we will
set up a table uh with an engine. um at
the uh co-op gas station uh we'll have
water, Gatorade, uh treats uh and things
of those nature or of that nature,
pardon me, for for the writers. Uh there
is an opportunity for council uh myself
even uh to meet with the ride organizers
uh Jim and Steve um who will who are
leading the uh leading the charge so to
speak across the country uh where we can
welcome them to the town and of course
uh that's where council uh is is
obviously more than welcome or be great
to have council there to to welcome the
group there.
>> Thank you. So, if anybody uh in the
community would like to come out and see
them, um please anybody who wishes to
please come and uh and stop in and say
hello to them. Um and certainly council,
you're um invited as well. So, that's on
Friday. So, I think that's all of the
issues that I have today. So I will um
move to the in camera portion of the
meeting and that pursuant to section 91
of the community charter a part of the
council meeting may be closed to the
public if the subject matter being
considered relates to one or more of the
following. 91K negotiations and related
discussions respecting the proposed
provision of a municipal service that
are at their preliminary stages and that
in the view of the council could
reasonably be expected to harm the
interests of the municipality if they
were held in public. Could I have a
motion to go in camera? Thank you.
Councelor Puerto Rica. Councelor King.
All in favor?